Dataset Information

No Difference in Return to Sport and Other Outcomes Between Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Medial Epicondyle Fractures in Pediatric Upper-Extremity Athletes.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Compare outcomes of operative and nonoperatively managed medial epicondyle fractures in upper-extremity athletes.

Design

Retrospective chart review and phone survey.

Setting

Level 1, tertiary-referral pediatric hospital.

Patients

Propensity scores (probability of operative treatment) were estimated from a logistic regression model that included sex, age, displacement, limb dominance, and injury severity (presence of an additional fracture, nerve injury, or elbow dislocation). These were used to match subjects in the operative group to the nonoperative group.

Main outcome measures

Return to sport, duration of time required to return to sport, pain, range of motion (ROM), need for physical therapy, and complications were recorded for both groups.

Results

Twenty-eight nonoperative subjects were matched to 14 operative subjects. There was no significant difference in the proportion of subjects who returned to the same sport (92.9% in each group), performance at preinjury level of competition, or median time to return to play (P = 0.7106). There was no significant difference in functional limitations in social-/work-related activities (P > 0.9999), pain in the past 30 days (P = 0.0640), need for physical therapy (P = 0.5680), ROM limitations (P = 0.0988), difficulty in sleeping (P = 0.4773), or complications (P = 0.4081).

Conclusions

Our study found no statistical difference in outcomes or complications between operative and nonoperatively treated moderately displaced medial epicondyle fractures in adolescent upper-extremity athletes. Our data show that similar outcomes may be achieved with both treatment groups for medial epicondyle fractures in upper-extremity athletes.

SUBMITTER: Axibal DP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6443487 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceUnstable ankle fractures are routinely managed operatively. However, because of soft tissue and implant-related complications, recent literature has reported on the nonoperative management of well-reduced medial malleolus fractures after fibular stabilization, but with limited evidence supporting the routine application.ObjectiveTo assess the superiority of internal fixation of well-reduced (displacement ≤2 mm) medial malleolus fractures compared with nonfixation after fibular stabilization.Design, setting, and participantsThis superiority, pragmatic, parallel, prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted from October 1, 2017, to August 31, 2021. A total of 154 adult participants (≥16 years) with a closed, unstable bimalleolar or trimalleolar ankle fracture requiring surgery at an academic major trauma center in the UK were assessed. Exclusion criteria included injuries with no medial-sided fracture, open fractures, neurovascular injury, and the inability to comply with follow-up. Data analysis was performed in July 2022 and confirmed in September 2023.InterventionsOnce the lateral (and where appropriate, posterior) malleolus had been fixed and satisfactory intraoperative reduction of the medial malleolus fracture was confirmed by the operating surgeon, participants were randomly allocated to fixation (n = 78) or nonfixation (n = 76) of the medial malleolus.Main outcome and measureOlerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) 1 year after randomization (range, 0-100 points, with 0 indicating worst possible outcome and 100 indicating best possible outcome).ResultsAmong 154 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [16.7] years; 119 [77%] female), 144 (94%) completed the trial. At 1 year, the median OMAS was 80.0 (IQR, 60.0-90.0) in the fixation group compared with 72.5 (IQR, 55.0-90.0) in the nonfixation group (P = .17). Complication rates were comparable. Significantly more patients in the nonfixation group developed a radiographic nonunion (20% vs 0%; P < .001), with 8 of 13 clinically asymptomatic; 1 patient required surgical reintervention for this. Fracture type and reduction quality appeared to influence fracture union and patient outcome.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial comparing internal fixation of well-reduced medial malleolus fractures with nonfixation, after fibular stabilization, fixation was not superior according to the primary outcome. However, 1 in 5 patients developed a radiographic nonunion after nonfixation, and although the reintervention rate to manage this was low, the future implications are unknown. These results support selective nonfixation of anatomically reduced medial malleolar fractures after fibular stabilization.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03362229.

Project description:PurposeFollowing medial epicondyle fractures, a subset of pediatric patients has persistent limitations in elbow motion. This study soughted to understand the patient characteristics of this group and to assess the effectiveness of intensive therapy and ulnar nerve transposition in improving elbow range of motion and patient-reported outcomes.MethodsA cohort of 31 pediatric patients with stiffness after elbow trauma was narrowed to 8 pediatric patients (7 female) ranging in age from 9 to 14 years, who were diagnosed with medial epicondyle fractures and underwent intensive therapy and ulnar nerve transposition with or without elbow joint release. We collected demographic and objective data as well as subjective data including Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores before and after ulnar nerve transposition.ResultsFollowing initial intensive therapy, elbow range of motion improved by an average of 56°, and 7 of the 8 patients reached a functional motion arc of 100°. Subsequently, following ulnar nerve surgery with or without elbow release, motion improved by an average of 22°, and 5 of the 8 patients demonstrated improvement from this intervention. Surgery led to improvements in subjective outcomes with an improvement in PROMIS mobility scores by an average of 9 points, pain interference by 6 points, and upper extremity scores by 3 points. Based on a previously determined minimally important difference of three points, these indicate significant clinical improvements.ConclusionsA subset of pediatric patients with persistent stiffness following medial epicondyle fractures may benefit from additional interventions, including intensive therapy, transposition of the ulnar nerve, and open capsular release. However, not all patients were improved after ulnar nerve surgery, and the identification and treatment of ulnar nerve irritability may not fully resolve preoperative symptoms in all patients.Type of study/level of evidenceTherapeutic IV.

Project description:To systemically review all studies reporting return to sport following tibial plateau fracture, in order to provide information on return rates and times to sport, and to assess variations in sporting outcome for different treatment methods.A systematic search of CINAHAL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PEDro, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science was performed in January 2017 using the keywords "tibial", "plateau", "fractures", "knee", "athletes", "sports", "non-operative", "conservative", "operative", "return to sport". All studies which recorded return rates and times to sport following tibial plateau fractures were included.Twenty-seven studies were included: 1 was a randomised controlled trial, 7 were prospective cohort studies, 16 were retrospective cohort studies, 3 were case series. One study reported on the outcome of conservative management (n = 3); 27 reported on the outcome of surgical management (n = 917). Nine studies reported on Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) (n = 193), 11 on Arthroscopic-Assisted Reduction Internal Fixation (ARIF) (n = 253) and 7 on Frame-Assisted Fixation (FRAME) (n = 262). All studies recorded "return to sport" rates. Only one study recorded a "return to sport" time. The return rate to sport for the total cohort was 70%. For the conservatively-managed fractures, the return rate was 100%. For the surgically-managed fractures, the return rate was 70%. For fractures managed with ORIF, the return rate was 60%. For fractures managed with ARIF, the return rate was 83%. For fractures managed with FRAME was 52%. The return rate for ARIF was found to be significantly greater than that for ORIF (OR 3.22, 95%CI: 2.09-4.97, P < 0.001) and for FRAME (OR 4.33, 95%CI: 2.89-6.50, P < 0.001). No difference was found between the return rates for ORIF and FRAME (OR 1.35, 95%CI: 0.92-1.96, P = 0.122). The recorded return time was 6.9 mo (median), from a study reporting on ORIF.Return rates to sport for tibial plateau fractures remain limited compared to other fractures. ARIF provides the best return rates. There is limited data regarding return times to sport. Further research is required to determine return times to sport, and to improve return rates to sport, through treatment and rehabilitation optimisation.

Project description:ContextAcute tibial shaft fractures represent one of the most severe injuries in sports. Return rates and return-to-sport times after these injuries are limited, particularly with regard to the outcomes of different treatment methods.ObjectiveTo determine the current evidence for the treatment of and return to sport after tibial shaft fractures.Data sourcesOVID/MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Collaboration Database, Web of Science, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and Google Scholar were all searched for articles published from 1988 to 2014.Study selectionInclusion criteria comprised studies of level 1 to 4 evidence, written in the English language, that reported on the management and outcome of tibial shaft fractures and included data on either return-to-sport rate or time. Studies that failed to report on sporting outcomes, those of level 5 evidence, and those in non-English language were excluded.Study designSystematic review.Level of evidenceLevel 4.Data extractionThe search used combinations of the terms tibial, tibia, acute, fracture, athletes, sports, nonoperative, conservative, operative, and return to sport. Two authors independently reviewed the selected articles and created separate data sets, which were subsequently combined for final analysis.ResultsA total of 16 studies (10 retrospective, 3 prospective, 3 randomized controlled trials) were included (n = 889 patients). Seventy-six percent (672/889) of the patients were men, with a mean age of 27.7 years. Surgical management was assessed in 14 studies, and nonsurgical management was assessed in 8 studies. Return to sport ranged from 12 to 54 weeks after surgical intervention and from 28 to 182 weeks after nonsurgical management (mean difference, 69.5 weeks; 95% CI, -83.36 to -55.64; P < 0.01). Fractures treated surgically had a return-to-sport rate of 92%, whereas those treated nonsurgically had a return rate of 67% (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.57; P < 0.01).ConclusionThe general principles are to undertake surgical management for displaced fractures and to attempt nonsurgical management for undisplaced fractures. Primary surgical intervention of undisplaced fractures, however, may result in higher return rates and shorter return times, though this exposes the patient to the risk of surgical complications, which include surgical site infection and compartment syndrome.

Project description:BackgroundThere are limited data reporting the outcome of patients with non-operatively managed medial malleolus fractures compared to those treated surgically in the presence of fibular stabilisation for unstable fractures of the ankle. Conservative management could result in fewer complications, reduced surgical time and lower cost. The purpose of this study is to determine if any difference exists in patient reported and surgical outcomes 1 year after surgery between operative and non-operative treatment of medial malleolar fractures in combination with stabilisation of the lateral malleolus.Methods/designThis is a single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled trial that aims to randomise 154 participants with an unstable ankle fracture to 'non-fixation' (n = 77) or 'fixation' (n = 77) of an associated well-reduced medial malleolus fracture following fibular stabilisation. The study will include patients ≥ 16 years of age with a closed bimalleolar or trimalleolar ankle fracture who are able to consent, complete questionnaires in the English language, and complete follow-up over a 1-year period. Randomisation will occur intra-operatively when the medial malleolus fracture is deemed 'well-reduced', with 2 mm or less of fluoroscopic displacement. The technique for fixation of both the medial and lateral malleoli is at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Patient-reported, observer-rated, and radiographic assessments will be collected at baseline and then at the following post-operative assessment points: 2 weeks, 6 weeks and 1 year. Postal questionnaire outcome data will be collected at 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome measure will be the Olerud Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) at 1 year following surgery. Secondary outcome measures will include the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), pain, treatment satisfaction, time to return to activity, operative tourniquet time, and complications.DiscussionThere is only one previous randomised trial comparing non-fixation with fixation of associated medial malleolus fractures but that was limited by the lack of baseline patient-reported outcome data and an inferior sample size. This current prospective trial aims to provide high-quality evidence regarding the requirement for medial malleolar fixation in unstable ankle fractures.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03362229 . Registered retrospectively on 5 December 2017.